[One_who_hopes_to_know]

As I said previously, my main point was to highlight some of the nuances of the political situation in the UK which seem to have escaped you ...

It has hardly escaped me when the point of my post dealt directly with the culture in which these muslims operate.

The point of the post was that these muslims can not bring themselves to condemn the terrorist plot. Instead they condemn the government that caught the terrorists.

You pointed out that Blair's stance against terrorism is not wholly supported. This is the same dissembling, irrelevant, non-sequitor that these islamofascist appeasers use when they are called out for not condemning terorism. ... Thus, I called you a islamofascist appeaser.

If in fact you are not, I apologize. Perhaps you are just one of those people that posts whatever is running through your mind at the moment without thinking that you were employing the same tactic as other islamofascist appeasers. If so my apologies, and in that case I would only offer a suggestion that you think about the meaining of your arguments before posting.

[Canard]

"You pointed out that Blair's stance against terrorism is not wholly supported. This is the same dissembling, irrelevant, non-sequitor that these islamofascist appeasers use when they are called out for not condemning terorism"

No it isn't, it's a (fairly obvious and non-controversial) comment on internal Labour Party politics which involved no particular value judgement on my part. I'm not sure how such a thing can possibly be 'appeasing' anyone. I'm not even sure if you're saying that I should not be discussing the wider political context and implications of this opposition to Blair's policies from within his own party and own supporters. Or if you're saying that I avoid 'appeasement' by declaring that the whole of Blair's party is squarely behind him, even though the statement is clearly false and it's not like I care if the party implodes anyway.